When dang pointed out how asking for upvotes is against HN policies, the argument Maciej put forward was - "Hey. If I knew about this, do you think I would have done it?". Really? "ignorantia juris non excusat". This is nothing but high level of arrogance and unprofessionalism.
This is coming from someone biased since my Apply HN was disqualified for the same reason. Before you make a quick judgement of Maciej and myself, I'd ask you to take a better look at the Hacker News website and the Apply HN post itself.
2. If you take a look at the submissions page, as of this moment there's no link to HN's guidelines, or even a mention of it. Nor is there a link or mention to the FAQ.
3. If you look at the stated rules for Apply HN, there's a) add Apply HN to the title, b) comment and 'be nice' and c) rules for scoring (which are designed to account for upvotes). You'll only see the mention about asking for upvotes, pretty deep in the thread. If it's that important then the announcement should be updated to reflect it
4. When you reference 'What We Look for in Founders' (http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html), it sends a mixed message because #4 comes to mind. "Though the most successful founders are usually good people, they tend to have a piratical gleam in their eye. They're not Goody Two-Shoes type good. Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties... They delight in breaking rules, but not rules that matter." Of course "rules that matter" are going to be arbitrary.
If HN is going to be really strict about the rules, then it would be nice if the rules were referenced more often and if they were more specific ie. if a 'rule' is broken that isn't written down e.g a 'spiritual' rule, it would be nice if it would be written down for posterity
This said, I'm still happy about the end result of the 1st Apply HN, though it kind of shocks me that the winners were rejected during F3.
It very much should, though. Especially with the over-abundance of stupid bureaucratic laws covering all aspects of life. And, that quote aside, that ignorantia is actually considered as an excuse by courts in judging certain cases, at least as a sign that no malicious intent was present.
Plus, it's not that different from the “They did not know it was impossible so they did it” Mark Twain quote.
